by Dr Hichem Karoui (Senior Researcher)
The contemporary foreign policy approaches of Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, characterized by explicit threats, public humiliation of allies, and military coercion, represent a significant departure from traditional diplomatic norms. This analysis examines whether such “peace through strength” methodologies constitute legitimate statecraft or fundamentally destructive patterns that historical precedent suggests lead to imperial decline and strategic isolation.
The historical record provides a clear verdict on foreign policy approaches that prioritize coercion over cooperation and military pressure over diplomatic engagement. Every major power that pursued “peace through strength” without regard for other nations’ legitimate interests ultimately created the coalition that destroyed it.
The Contemporary Coercive Diplomacy Model
The current implementation of “peace through strength” by both Trump and Netanyahu follows a distinct pattern that prioritizes immediate compliance through intimidation over long-term relationship building.
. Trump’s approach to Gulf states exemplifies this methodology, combining public threats with demands for financial tribute under the guise of security arrangements . His statement that Saudi Arabia “wouldn’t last 2 weeks without us” represents a fundamental departure from traditional alliance management, transforming partnerships into protection rackets
The empirical evidence reveals significant gaps between claimed achievements and actual outcomes.
While Trump touted over $2 trillion in deals from his 2025 Gulf tour, Reuters analysis indicates actual agreements totaled approximately $730 billion, with many consisting of non-binding memoranda of understanding . This pattern of inflated claims mirrors historical precedents where authoritarian leaders exaggerated their diplomatic successes to maintain domestic support.
Netanyahu’s parallel application of this doctrine in Gaza follows similar logic, articulating three prerequisites for peace: complete destruction of Hamas, total demilitarization, and comprehensive deradicalization of Palestinian society.
His adoption of Trump’s formulation—”first comes strength, then comes peace”—demonstrates the coordinated nature of these approaches . However, the practical results show Hamas’s organizational structure remains largely intact despite significant military pressure.
Historical Parallels: The Fatal Pattern of Military-First Diplomacy
Historical analysis reveals disturbing parallels between contemporary “peace through strength” implementations and the aggressive expansion policies that precipitated the collapse of major empires.. The Nazi German and fascist Italian models provide particularly relevant case studies, as both Hitler and Mussolini explicitly believed that military superiority alone could secure their strategic objectives
The Third Reich’s approach bears striking similarities to current methodologies: public threats against neighbors, demands for tribute disguised as “protection,” and the systematic erosion of international legal norms
Hitler’s violation of the Munich Agreement within six months of signing it parallels contemporary patterns of agreement abandonment when convenient . Similarly, Mussolini’s imperial expansion in Ethiopia demonstrated how “peace through strength” without diplomatic foundations ultimately created broader enemy coalitions.
Imperial Japan’s Pacific expansion offers another instructive parallel.
Japanese leadership believed their military superiority would force Western powers to accept their sphere of influence, yet this approach ultimately provoked the very coalition that destroyed them . The contemporary formation of China-Russia-Iran partnerships in response to US pressure follows identical strategic logic.
Quantitative Analysis: The Economics of Imperial Overstretch
The relationship between military spending and imperial longevity reveals concerning patterns for contemporary powers pursuing aggressive expansion.
Historical data demonstrates an inverse correlation between the percentage of national resources devoted to military purposes and the duration of imperial systems.
Current US military spending, while substantial in absolute terms at over $900 billion annually, represents approximately 3.5% of GDP, significantly lower than historical peak periods.
However, the cumulative costs of recent military interventions, estimated between $4-6 trillion for Iraq and Afghanistan alone, indicate dangerous trends toward the kind of resource exhaustion that historically preceded imperial decline.
The concept of “imperial overstretch,” as defined by historian Paul Kennedy, encompasses geographic, economic, and military dimensions of unsustainable expansion.
Contemporary US operations exhibit all three characteristics: global military presence spanning over 800 bases worldwide, massive deficit spending to fund military operations, and increasing difficulty maintaining alliance cohesion while pursuing unilateral objectives.
International Response: Alliance Erosion and Strategic Realignment
The international response to contemporary coercive diplomacy reveals systematic alliance degradation across all major regions.
Empirical polling data demonstrates significant declines in trust toward US leadership among traditional allies.
NATO European allies show a 23-percentage-point decline in confidence, from 85% to 62%, while East Asian allies experienced a 19-point drop from 88% to 69%.
These declining trust levels correlate directly with specific policy responses that undermine US strategic objectives. European allies have accelerated efforts toward strategic autonomy, including independent defense capabilities that reduce dependence on US security guarantees. Gulf Arab states, despite public compliance with US demands, increasingly hedge their strategic positions through expanded engagement with China and Russia.
The formation of alternative power arrangements represents the most significant strategic consequence of coercive diplomacy.
The expansion of BRICS membership, alternative trade route development, and coordinated resistance to US sanctions demonstrate how aggressive approaches catalyze exactly the kind of opposing coalitions that historically proved fatal to imperial powers.
The Blowback Phenomenon: Unintended Consequences of Coercion
The concept of “strategic blowback”—unintended consequences of aggressive foreign policies that ultimately harm national interests—provides a theoretical framework for understanding the counterproductive effects of contemporary approaches.
Documented incidents since 2019 demonstrate a clear pattern where increased pressure generates proportional resistance.
The Iranian missile attack on Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, resulting in 12 US casualties, exemplifies this dynamic.
The attack directly responded to US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, demonstrating Iran’s capability to impose costs on US regional operations . Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei’s declaration that “Iran will never surrender” reflects the kind of civilizational resistance that historically proved impossible to overcome through military pressure alone.
Similar patterns emerge across multiple theaters. The October 7 Hamas attack, while complex in its causation, occurred within a context of intensified Israeli pressure and settlement expansion. Houthi attacks on Saudi oil facilities in 2019 directly correlated with escalated US pressure on Iran. Each incident demonstrates how coercive approaches generate the very instability they purport to prevent.
Economic Sustainability and Resource Allocation
The economic sustainability of contemporary “peace through strength” approaches faces fundamental constraints that mirror historical imperial decline patterns.
Arms race dynamics create economic pressures that divert resources from productive sectors, potentially undermining the economic foundations necessary to sustain military capabilities.
Current US defense spending trends show concerning parallels to Soviet patterns during the 1980s.
While absolute spending continues to increase, the relative burden has declined as a percentage of GDP, masking the cumulative effect of sustained high military expenditure on economic competitiveness . The Soviet experience demonstrates how military competition can hollow out civilian economic capacity even when immediate collapse seems unlikely.
Yale historian Paul Kennedy’s analysis of imperial overstretch identifies the point where military commitments exceed economic capacity to sustain them without fundamental damage to domestic prosperity.
Current US deficit spending to maintain global military presence, combined with declining alliance burden-sharing, suggests approaching this critical threshold.
Moral Leadership vs. Coercive Dominance
The central question posed—whether contemporary behavior represents the foreign policy of a moral leader or resembles “thugs, mafia gangs and criminals”—requires examination of both methods and outcomes. Traditional American soft power rested on the perception that US leadership served broader international interests beyond narrow national advantage.
Contemporary approaches systematically undermine this perception through explicit transactionalism that reduces alliance relationships to protection rackets.
Trump’s public statement that Gulf states must “pay for protection” removes any pretense that US security commitments serve mutual interests rather than American financial benefit.
The comparison to historical criminal organizations becomes apt when examining the methodology: public threats, demands for tribute, punishment of non-compliance, and systematic violation of established norms. The key distinction lies in the international system’s anarchic structure, where no superior authority can enforce behavioral constraints on major powers.
Strategic Alternatives and Successful Models
Historical analysis reveals that “peace through strength” can succeed when implemented within specific parameters that contemporary approaches violate. Ronald Reagan’s approach during the 1980s combined military buildup with serious diplomatic engagement and alliance strengthening, ultimately achieving strategic objectives through negotiated agreements rather than pure coercion.
The Reagan model’s success stemmed from several factors absent in contemporary implementations: genuine commitment to diplomatic solutions, respect for alliance partners’ interests, and economic sustainability of military spending.
Reagan’s defense spending, while substantial, remained economically sustainable at approximately 6% of GDP while achieving strategic objectives through arms control agreements.
Contemporary approaches invert this successful formula by treating military pressure as an end in itself rather than a means to enable diplomatic solutions. The systematic degradation of diplomatic capabilities, explicit rejection of multilateral frameworks, and transactional treatment of allies represent fundamental departures from historically successful models.
Long-term Sustainability and Strategic Implications
The sustainability of contemporary coercive approaches faces multiple constraints that historical precedent suggests will prove decisive over time. The formation of opposing coalitions, degradation of alliance structures, and economic costs of sustained military pressure create cumulative pressures that become increasingly difficult to manage.
China and Russia’s strategic patience in allowing US overextension without direct confrontation follows successful historical models of exhausting aggressive powers.
By providing alternative frameworks for international engagement while avoiding direct military confrontation, these powers position themselves to benefit from American alliance degradation without bearing the costs of direct resistance.
The demographic and economic trends that will shape the next two decades favor powers that invest in productive capacity over those that prioritize military expenditure.
China’s Belt and Road Initiative and Russia’s energy partnerships provide concrete alternatives to US-dominated systems, reducing the effectiveness of American coercive leverage.
Conclusion: The Historical Verdict
The historical record provides a clear verdict on foreign policy approaches that prioritize coercion over cooperation and military pressure over diplomatic engagement. Every major power that pursued “peace through strength” without regard for other nations’ legitimate interests ultimately created the coalition that destroyed it.
The contemporary implementation by Trump and Netanyahu exhibits all the characteristics that historically preceded imperial collapse: systematic alliance degradation, economic overstretch, enemy coalition formation, and the delusion that military superiority alone can sustain political objectives. The question is not whether this approach will ultimately fail—historical precedent makes that outcome nearly certain—but rather how much damage it will inflict before its inevitable collapse.
The moral dimension cannot be separated from the strategic analysis. Foreign policy approaches that explicitly reject international law, systematically humiliate partners, and threaten civilian populations represent not strength but the desperation of declining powers unable to maintain influence through legitimate means. The comparison to criminal organizations becomes not merely rhetorical but analytically precise: both rely on threat and coercion because they cannot offer sufficient value to secure voluntary cooperation.
History’s lesson remains clear: sustainable power rests on the willing cooperation of others, not their fearful submission. Those who forget this lesson join the long list of powers that mistook temporary military advantage for permanent strategic dominance, only to discover that fear-based relationships dissolve the moment the feared power shows any sign of weakness.
MOST COMMENTED
Gulf / Our Books / Essays / International Relations / Book Release / Current Affairs / Podcast
The Gulf and the War Against Iran
Israel / Analyses & Commentaries / Current Affairs / USA / Iran / Gulf / MENA Matters / GEW Assessment Report
The Battle Over Truth: Analyzing Conflicting Narratives on US Strikes Against Iranian Nuclear Facilities
Literature / Media / Book Release / Podcast / Fiction
Isabelle Richard’s Novel, “The Unwritten Chapter” + Podcast Review
Literature / Media / Book Release / Podcast / Fiction
The Inner Circle : A Political Fiction by Hamon de Quillan + PODCAST REVIEW